Gingrich tax plan would add about $1 trillion to the federal deficit in a single year

GOP Presidential candidate Newt Gingrich is proposing a massive tax cut aimed at the highest earning American households. Gingrichâs plan would add about $1 trillion to the federal deficit in a single year. And while most of the nationâs lowest income families would get no benefit from these tax cuts, the top 0.1 percent (who make an average of more than $8 million) would get about a quarter of the windfall, according to new estimates by my colleagues at the Tax Policy Center.

In just the single year of 2015, Gingrichâs plan would increase the deficit by about $850 billion. Remember, while we are used to seeing numbers such as this describing the 10-year revenue loss of some tax plan, this is just the one-year cost. It is half again as generous as Perry, who would add merely $570 billion to the deficit.

ronald reagan came in with the same idea. huge tax breaks followed by spending cuts. how did that work out?
we just had an example of how spending cuts will go. the republicans, who have control of all spending bills by way of their control of congress, just passed a spending bill. so how much did they cut?

House Republicans Unveil Massive $1 Trillion Spending Bill,http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/12/15/house-republicans-spending-bill_n_1150294.html
The measure generally consists of relatively small adjustments to thousands of individual programs. Agencies like the Border Patrol and Immigration and Customs Enforcement will get a boost within the Homeland Security Department, while GOP defense hawks won additional funding to modernize the U.S. nuclear weapons arsenal. The troubled, over-budget, next-generation F-35 fighter plane program would be largely protected.

Hey Free...
What percent of an American slave's wages should our good government be allowed to steal?

More...

well that is one way of looking at it. there is another way for thinking people.
we live in a society that has to have a government to function. the government needs money to carry out the duties the citizens demand of it.
so the answer would be enough to fund the functions the citizens demand.

well that is one way of looking at it. there is another way for thinking people.
we live in a society that has to have a government to function. the government needs money to carry out the duties the citizens demand of it.
so the answer would be enough to fund the functions the citizens demand.

More...

Interesting, can we opt out of those services if we do not wish to contribute?

Interesting, can we opt out of those services if we do not wish to contribute?

More...

well probaly not because that would make government unable to function.
i would opt out of education spending since i dont have kids and i would opt out of military spending unless it was a driect attack on the us. if everybody did that the government could not function so we all pay for some things we hate.
i would offer a better solution. direct democracy. we would all vote online for the government functions we want. the cost and other details would be laid out for us before we vote.

well that is one way of looking at it. there is another way for thinking people.
we live in a society that has to have a government to function. the government needs money to carry out the duties the citizens demand of it.
so the answer would be enough to fund the functions the citizens demand.

Interesting, can we opt out of those services if we do not wish to contribute?

More...

It would be nice if when you figured out how much you owed on taxes, you were given a check list of all the different government beaurecracies, and how much of your taxes is going into each one, and then given a choice of whether or not you wanted access to a service, by giving the proportional amount of money to it.

Government would instantly be cut in half, if people had to check off the amount of their taxes they wanted to give to programs like the department of education, department of energy, or pretty much anything that starts with "department of......" Those programs have all just turned into useless beaurecracies, which are solely designed to give lazy people cush 6 figure jobs, where they can retire at the age of 50.